Armstrong v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Armstrong v. State

286 S.E.2d 526, 160 Ga. App. 239, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3038

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 29, 1981

Docket62665, 62666

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 286 S.E.2d 526 (Armstrong v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Armstrong v. State, 286 S.E.2d 526, 160 Ga. App. 239, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3038 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Chief Judge.

The defendant, a co-defendant of the defendant in the companion cases of Armstrong v. State, 160 Ga. App. 237, appeals from his conviction for burglary. Held:

1. For the reasons set forth in Division 5 of our opinion in Armstrong v. State, 160 Ga. App. 237, the evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

2. The state’s witness in this case who testified as to the formulation of the conspiracy agreement was not a co-conspirator. Therefore, the statute and cases cited by the defendant dealing with testimony by a co-conspirator are inapposite and inapplicable.

3. A charge on conspiracy was adjusted to the evidence.

4. The trial judge’s recharge was not subject to the objection urged against it.

5. Case 62665 involves the contention that the trial court erred in failing to grant a supersedeas bond pending appeal. In view of our rulings above, this issue is moot.

Judgment affirmed in case no. 62666; appeal dismissed in case no. 62665.

McMurray, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Quillian, Chief Judge.

The defendant, a co-defendant of the defendant in the companion cases of Armstrong v. State, 160 Ga. App. 237, appeals from his conviction for burglary. Held:

1. For the reasons set forth in Division 5 of our opinion in Armstrong v. State, 160 Ga. App. 237, the evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

2. The state’s witness in this case who testified as to the formulation of the conspiracy agreement was not a co-conspirator. Therefore, the statute and cases cited by the defendant dealing with testimony by a co-conspirator are inapposite and inapplicable.

3. A charge on conspiracy was adjusted to the evidence.

4. The trial judge’s recharge was not subject to the objection urged against it.

5. Case 62665 involves the contention that the trial court erred in failing to grant a supersedeas bond pending appeal. In view of our rulings above, this issue is moot.

Judgment affirmed in case no. 62666; appeal dismissed in case no. 62665.

McMurray, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 S.E.2d 526, 160 Ga. App. 239, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armstrong-v-state-gactapp-1981.

Opinion

3. A charge on conspiracy was adjusted to the evidence.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack